AngryFrenchGuy

Montréal-Nord Riot: Bombardier’s Bastards

with 123 comments

Why did Montréal-Nord catch fire?

Why did hundreds of kids spend the night setting cars on fire?

Because they couldn’t find any planes, trains or helicopters.

Because they say they are being treated like second class citizens. Because they are second class citizens

Three weeks ago Montrealers were congratulating themselves on Bombardier Aerospace’s decision to assemble it’s new CSeries aicraft in suburban Mirabel. Thousands of new jobs were coming our way. With Bombardier, it’s suppliers and competitors, there were now over 40 000 aerospace related jobs in Québec.

The people of Montréal-Nord knew they were not getting those jobs and that they would never get those jobs.

The thing is, with the government’s blessing (not to mention it’s money in the form of subsidies) and in total violation of Canadian law, many of Québec’s aerospace firms discriminates against Canadian citizens who have dual citizenship with countries like Haiti, Cuba, Venezuela, Lebanon and Viet Nam – over 25 countries in total.

Canadians born outside Canada. The type of Canadians who live in Montréal-Nord.

You see, if some of your employees have a passport from one of these countries, you’re not getting US Defense contracts, which are a big part of our “aerospace” industry.

Bell Helicopter Textron will not hire you and CAE will not hire you.

Bombardier’s Canadian operations are out of the defense business. For now. But some industry watchers suspect that many companies just don’t hire anyone born outside Canada or with multiple citizenship, just in case… You know, if something comes their way, it just makes things easier.

Unemployment in Montreal‘s Haïtian community – a very important community in Montréal-Nord – stands at a scandalous 18%. For North Africans, another important community in the area, it’s 28%.

Time and time and time again they watch the rest of Montreal, Québec and Canada celebrate the thousands of new high paying jobs that they will never get. They were expected to quietly sit this one out, close their eyes on a blatant, systematic and officially sanctioned violation of their citizenship and human rights and just wait for the next turn.

And you know what? That’s what they did. That’s what Freddy Villanova and his brother were doing the other night. Just chilling out and shooting craps like a million other ghetto kids around the world no one cares about. And then Freddy was shot.

It’s not cars they should’ve burned, it’s helicopters.

I dare anybody to lecture these kids about respecting the law.

Written by angryfrenchguy

August 12, 2008 at 4:52 pm

123 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. http://www.stat.gouv.qc.ca/donstat/econm_finnc/conjn_econm/TSC/pdf/chap13.pdf

    page 73 of this document has debt/GDP ratios and also debt per capita info on page 72. It’s in French though…

    Anonymous

    August 24, 2008 at 1:55 pm

  2. ABP, regarding exchange students from France…

    Quebec has an agreement with France whereby exchange students don’t pay hiked up foreigners’ fees. They pay as if they were locals.
    Assuming the number of students going both ways is about the same, it balances out : What sums Quebec doesn’t get from French exchange students, its own students going to France don’t get to shed out.

    How does that concern you or your daughter ?!!
    You are using the same faulty logic as above with equalization when you claim you are somehow financing something into it.

    Regarding that American student you mention, I’ll just let you note that a series of newspaper articles came out this summer about such cases, more or less denouncing them as people taking advantage of a loophole.
    I don’t know if they’re planing to close that loophole or not, and I don’t know how many Americans have used it, but it’s been widely denounced over here.

    Raman

    August 24, 2008 at 4:28 pm

  3. “How does that concern you or your daughter ?!!
    You are using the same faulty logic as above with equalization when you claim you are somehow financing something into it.”

    It doesn’t at all concern my daughter. Did I not say that it was fair game according to the rules.

    With regards to the other issue of subsidizing foreign countries or a country. You indicate that is give and take. Would be interesting to analyze what the effective transfer rate would between Quebec and France with regards to students.

    Bottom line, Quebec receives the lions share of equalizaton payments..and for at least this province we don’t have 1700.00 a year tuition…I should know, I have three professional sons and daughters and one currently at McGill who paid a hell of a lot more than 1700.00 per year in tuition.

    When I hear it is extended to France in Quebec universities I seriously wonder who’s logic if flawed.

    And, to the point, you still havent come up with any concrete reasons for why Quebec needs the level of equalization it receives as opposed to Ontario which has always paid into the fund.

    Perhaps you could shed some light on this for me?? As I have said, people have stated they (Quebec) have a well qualified and skilled labor force, and have a relatively successful manufacturing sector as well as a strong agricultural asset…and Tourism. So why is Quebec so different from Ontario.

    Perhaps you could enlighten us all?

    ABP

    ABP

    August 24, 2008 at 10:11 pm

  4. “You are using the same faulty logic as above with equalization when you claim you are somehow financing something into it.”

    Je suis desole, I missed this one.

    When others are contributing about 13% of your total provincial revenue they are subsidizing virtually everything in Quebec. Remember, Raman, the government is free to spend this as they want. Could be infrastructure, day care or post secondary tuitions. The fact is, the money is provided for use in Quebec. How can you deny the fact of the equalization and the amount Quebec receives.

    You can put your head in the sand, but it doe not change the facts.

    ABP

    ABP

    August 24, 2008 at 10:23 pm

  5. “Just a small point on this. Native affairs are a federal jurisdiction, so if there are differences between the provinces, it should not really be due to provincial policies.”

    This is true on paper but in practice in Quebec at least native affairs are a shared responsibility between the provincial and federal governments. For example, the Quebec government created automous, community-run school boards for the Cree and Inuit of northern Quebec as part of the James Bay Agreement (that paved the way for the huge hydro developments in the 1970s). These boards took over the schools from the federal department of Indian Affairs.

    “By the way, do you have any figures regarding the differences between the ROC and Quebec?”

    For some odd reason, it is very difficult to find data on this. The latest numbers I could find are from Stats Can about 10 years ago and showed that the average income for natives in Quebec was $18,384, versus $17,773 in Canada (including Quebec), which means that aboriginal income in the ROC when you take Quebec out of the equation is even lower than the $17,773 cited for “Canada”. On the whole, natives in Quebec made about 75% of what non-natives made, whereas the overall average in Canada is 66% of what non-natives made (once again, if you take Quebec out this means that native incomes in the ROC are probably around 60% of non-natives’).

    Natives in Quebec also generally have lower levels of substance abuse, much higher rates of aboriginal language retention (with the possible exception of the Inuit of Nunavut) and also much lower rates of incarceration than those in the ROC. Some figures on incarceration:

    http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/060606/d060606b.htm

    In February 1998, L’Actualité (the francophone equivalent to Macleans) published an article by André Lachance entitled “Du mauvais côté de la baie James”, which compared the situations of aboriginals in Ontario and Quebec, with a particular focus on the Cree communities living on the shores of James Bay, which span both provinces. The contrasts between Quebec and Ontario were striking, and the article won the Canadian National Magazine gold prize for that year.

    Admittedly, much of the difference between Quebec and the ROC stems from the James Bay Agreement, which applies to Cree and Inuit populations in northern and northwestern Quebec. These groups comprise close to one third of all the aboriginals in Quebec (25,000 out of 75,000). Though far from 100% satisfactory, the Agreement has allowed these two nations to achieve modest levels of prosperity (certainly in comparison with their aboriginal brethren elsewhere in North America). Of course, this hasn’t resolved everything, and their relations with the Quebec government are still sometimes tenuous, as evidenced by the distinct Cree and Inuit referenda just before Quebec’s 1995 referendum, where more than 90% of the two native groups rejected going along with Quebec independence.

    Also interesting is that in spite of the fact that the situation of natives in Quebec is “relatively better” than in the ROC, public opinion on native issues in Quebec is generally harder-line than in the ROC. This is a relatively recent phenomenon (less than 20 years) related to the Oka Crisis of 1990. Prior to this, public opinion vis-à-vis natives in Quebec was generally positive (perhaps moreso than in the ROC), maybe owing to the fact that something close to half of the so-called non-native francophone population in Quebec has at least some native blood in them.

    In any event, Oka opened up some wounds that have not yet completely healed. To put it in perspective, imagine if a group of natives completely blockaded and shut down a major freeway like the Queen Elizabeth Way leading into Toronto for three or four months straight. I think this might have just a slight impact on public opinion vis-à-vis natives in Ontario.

    Note that the Oka Crisis took place while Quebec was under a Liberal government. The James Bay Agreement was also signed by the Liberals. The referendum of 1995 was of course held by a Parti Québécois government, and PQ governments have also signed numerous treaties with aboriginal groups, most notably the 2002 “Paix des Braves” with the Cree, a follow-up to the James Bay Agreement that addressed several areas of discord.

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 9:09 am

  6. Acajack wrote: “On the whole, natives in Quebec made about 75% of what non-natives made, whereas the overall average in Canada is 66% of what non-natives made (once again, if you take Quebec out this means that native incomes in the ROC are probably around 60% of non-natives’).”

    I wonder whether this actually means that natives have more after-tax income than non-natives. I say this because natives do not have to pay federal and provincial income tax or GST or PST, so the lower amount for them could actually be a higher amount once tax is factored in.

    I was in Washcaganish near James Bay during the Oka Crisis. This is a Cree community that used to be headed by Chief Billy Diamond. I was one of only three Whites during a community meeting in which about 100 Cree were there and at one point we were watching CBC’s “The National” which was doing an extended piece on the Oka Crisis as well as the take-over of the Mercier Bridge by the Kahnawake community.

    You are quite right to assign the blame of the current negative feelings of the Quebec Aboriginal communities to this crisis, Acajack. Let me tell you that it was NOT comfortable being one of the three Whites in that room that night despite the fact that they knew we were on their side in the crisis (we were anglos and the Indians automatically sided with the anglos against the Quebec Government). There was incredible solidarity between the Cree and what was happening to the Mohawks.

    As for the modest levels of prosperity achieved by the Cree and Inuit as a result of the James Bay agreement: Yes, I think that it is clear that this agreement has brought prosperity to these communities, at least from the White Man’s perspective and way of looking at these things. While we were there, Billy Diamond make a big point of bringing us around to all the different businesses of the communities and demonstrating their lifestyle and their zero alcohol tolerance policy. But I couldn’t help getting the feeling that they had sold their souls. The Cree were a nomadic people who spent much of their time off on weeks or month-long hunts looking for food; they didn’t all live together in communities but were scattered about, living largely off the immense land that was taken over by James Bay for the hydroelectric project.

    Now, they were in a small, tightly-knit community with their traditional lifestyle mostly abandoned.

    Is this a good thing? Well, for US it is because we got to flood their traditional hunting lands and we got a lot of electricity. They got paid off but, in the process, may have lost their souls.

    Tony Kondaks

    August 25, 2008 at 9:53 am

  7. Look ABP, all through this thread I’ve asked a very simple question : Please demonstrate that, were Quebec to shed all its “generous” social services, it would receive less equalization.
    You’ve failed.

    As I quickly get tired of repeating myself, I’ll take a break from this topic for now.
    But here is a plan for you and I to consider until next time.

    1) Since your real concern appears to be equalization, and since you’ve admitted that Quebec hasn’t received as much per capita as other provinces, I suggest you find yourself a Maritimer’s blog and go whine over there.
    You could maybe adapt your tactics when you make the move. -First, figure out something they get cheaper than you do. I guess cod would do. Then start complaining that, since they receive equalization, you’re subsidizing their cheap fish. (Same leap of logic that you’ve been doing here.)

    [While you’re over there, maybe you can also try to solve the following puzzle : How could they wrestle even more per capita equalization than Quebec without threatening separation ?…]

    2) As for myself, I’ll find a Westerner’s blog and go bitch over there. I’ll do as I mentioned in a post above, in true ABP fashion :
    -I’ll keep repeating that Quebecers have subsidized decades of lower income tax for Westerners, subsidized your cattle and farming industries, subsidized oily sand development… And then I’ll get to rant about how ungrateful you are for wanting to take your marbles out of the system just when your oil unexpectedly becomes profitable.

    Happy trails.

    Raman

    August 25, 2008 at 10:08 am

  8. “I wonder whether this actually means that natives have more after-tax income than non-natives. I say this because natives do not have to pay federal and provincial income tax or GST or PST, so the lower amount for them could actually be a higher amount once tax is factored in.”

    Don’t know if this is what you’re getting at but this doesn’t really have anything to do with the disparity in native incomes in Quebec vs. the ROC.

    The tax exemptions are exactly the same in the ROC and in Quebec, so more average income for natives in Quebec is still more income than they make in the ROC, regardless of whether it’s taxed or not (which it isn’t).

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 10:20 am

  9. Acajack:

    No, my intention was not to compare natives in Quebec with natives in the ROC but natives with non-natives.

    Tony Kondaks

    August 25, 2008 at 10:24 am

  10. “Let me tell you that it was NOT comfortable being one of the three Whites in that room that night despite the fact that they knew we were on their side in the crisis (we were anglos and the Indians automatically sided with the anglos against the Quebec Government).”

    Yes, it’s true that aboriginal communities in Quebec generally side with English-speaking Canadians on any issue related to Quebec.

    There is a language affinity for sure (of which a big part is media-influenced – they listen to anglo media and hence get the anglo view on Quebec), but I think it’s unwise to think that it’s really because they think you guys are great and that we’re not.

    It’s chiefly a power thing. Two levels of government actually have considerable influence on the lives of aboriginals in this part of the world: Quebec and Canada. Obviously, it’s much easier to take on the Quebec provincial government and francophone Canadians (with a view to obtaining concessions) than it is to take on the lily-white image of the Canadian federal government and Anglo-Canada (and Anglo North America by extension). On a continental and perhaps even global scale, Quebec has a few high-profile vulnerabilities (negatives) that aboriginal groups like the Cree can exploit, from Bill 101 to the separation issue that threatens to break up the “most bestest country in the world (plusse meilleur pays du monde). Sure, the ROC, Anglo-Canada and even the federal government have lots of nasty stuff on their hands (much of it involving the native population, to be frank), but unfortunately the truth is that there is a much, much more attentive ear out there for stuff that confirms that Quebec francophones are a bunch of borderline fascists.

    Native groups have skilfully taken note of Quebec’s Achilles’ heel and have become particularly adept at hitting this target.

    I don’t blame them at all for doing this, as I would likely do the same in their situation. But I sincerely hope that people don’t have any illusions about why things are the way they are.

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 10:36 am

  11. “Look ABP, all through this thread I’ve asked a very simple question : Please demonstrate that, were Quebec to shed all its “generous” social services, it would receive less equalization.
    You’ve failed.”

    Likely not!! with the system the way it is.

    You still haven’t explained to me why Quebec’s economy is so bad that the province needs equalization at all. Seems to me, that with 23% of population of the country, well educated people and an industrial and manufacturing base that Quebec shouldnt be all the different from Ontario or at least somewhat similar.

    So then Raman, what is the problem?

    You haven’t answered my simple question.. I answered yours. “likely not”

    ABP

    ABP

    August 25, 2008 at 10:36 am

  12. “-I’ll keep repeating that Quebecers have subsidized decades of lower income tax for Westerners, subsidized your cattle and farming industries, subsidized oily sand development… And then I’ll get to rant about how ungrateful you are for wanting to take your marbles out of the system just when your oil unexpectedly becomes profitable.”

    Go do some research and get back to me on how Quebec has subsidized the West or any other part of Canada. Quebec has been on the wagon since the programs inception. Quebec in fact pays nothing for the ROC as Quebec receives all the federal tax dollars back by abatement, equalization and other transfers and has for many years.

    ABP

    ABP

    August 25, 2008 at 10:41 am

  13. ABP:

    One of the main reasons for the economic disparity between Quebec and Ontario is the fact that a large swath of Quebec (very roughly located east of Quebec City) is actually much more similar socio-economically to the Maritimes than it is to the Quebec City-Windsor corridor that is part of the larger North American Great Lakes heartland. Ontario doesn’t have this type of region.

    If you take this eastern area of Quebec out of the equation, then Quebec is quite similar to Ontario: a populated south with one big uncontested metropolis (Montreal and Toronto), a large secondary, largely administrative city (Quebec City and Ottawa), a series of smaller cities (some industrial cities, others more university/knowledge based), topped off by a huge sparsely populated mining and forestry region dotted with a handful of regional population centres.

    Quebec as a whole is already fairly close to Ontario on per capita income and unemployment rates, and I suspect the gap would almost vanish if the more depressed areas of eastern Quebec were taken out of the equation.

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 10:53 am

  14. “I would suppose it is the people from Ontario who should have the biggest bitch with the whole thing and some I have talked to have indicated this.”

    Well they did get the Auto Pact as a really, really, really nice plum from Ottawa at one point, didn’t they?

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 10:56 am

  15. “Well they did get the Auto Pact as a really, really, really nice plum from Ottawa at one point, didn’t they?”

    Yes, at one time..you are right. Also your comments on the differences I find quite intersesting. I became mildly interested in this and came across this article which is really quite objective on the state of the Quebec economy over the past 25 years.

    http://www.iedm.org/uploaded/pdf/mai2007_en.pdf

    Found some of the facts and trends very interesting.

    ABP

    ABP

    August 25, 2008 at 11:15 am

  16. Ontario also got Sir John A. Macdonald’s National Policy, the St. Lawrence Seaway allowing ships to bypass Montreal and creating inland ports on the Great Lakes (all of which border Ontario except one), the centralization of airline traffic at Toronto’s Pearson Airport, etc.

    Now, I don’t have anything against Ontario (actually I’ve spent more years there than in any other province), but if they haven’t had the foresight to parlay the tremendous head start and advantages that have been showered upon them over the years (compared to every other region of Canada, including the West), into durable prosperity, then what can we do?

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 11:26 am

  17. “http://www.iedm.org/uploaded/pdf/mai2007_en.pdf

    Found some of the facts and trends very interesting.

    ABP”

    Interesting piece by the IEDM. Of course, studies such as these are a dime a dozen in Quebec, so you have to take some and leave some. In Quebec, we’ve got the habit of studying and debating the crap out of every single issue down to an art.

    I’ve really noticed this since I moved here from Ontario. Every once in a while there is an issue that comes out of the woodwork and dominates public and even private discourse for a period of time. The whole Bouchard-Taylor/reasonable accommodation thing is a prime example of this.

    For sure, the same thing doesn’t exist in Ontario, where you would think the prospect of losing its traditional place as Canada’s economic powerhouse and becoming a have-not province should be the subject of much talk both public and private, on the airwaves, in the papers, etc.

    Sure, there’s been some talk, but when you consider what’s at stake, there isn’t really much that’s been said on it. (I monitor the Ontario news media pretty much on a daily basis.) But if Ontario were Quebec, you’d have had news conferences by notable personalities taking positions on this, books written on it with their authors appearing on all the talk shows. Heck, Denys Arcand might even have a movie on the topic slated for release at Christmas… OK, maybe I am exaggerating a bit on this last point.

    But the truth is that people in Quebec seem to debate issues collectively much more often than they do in Ontario (I suspect this is probably case everywhere in the ROC as well).

    Don’t know why that is. Maybe it’s because lots of people in the ROC get their news from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, so they’re not as in tune with issues close to home as Quebecers are?

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 12:07 pm

  18. “One of the main reasons for the economic disparity between Quebec and Ontario is the fact that a large swath of Quebec (very roughly located east of Quebec City) is actually much more similar socio-economically to the Maritimes than it is to the Quebec City-Windsor corridor that is part of the larger North American Great Lakes heartland. Ontario doesn’t have this type of region.”

    I highly doubt that this has much to do with, just due to the numbers. Easto fo Quebec city is very small. Montreal is 50% of the population, the Quebec city region must be another 13-14%, Gatineau 3-4%, Estrie and Mauricie 7% combined. You are already at 3/4 of the population. No way that 10-15% of the population brings the average down by that much.

    Anonymous

    August 25, 2008 at 2:10 pm

  19. Acajack,

    I wonder if the differences between Natives in Quebec and the ROC could be due to the fact in some of the Western provinces at least, more Natives live off reserves than in Quebec.

    With respect to taxes, does it matter where one lives? Do Natives not have to pay certain taxes if they live off reserves?

    Anonymous

    August 25, 2008 at 2:13 pm

  20. “Yes, it’s true that aboriginal communities in Quebec generally side with English-speaking Canadians on any issue related to Quebec.

    There is a language affinity for sure (of which a big part is media-influenced – they listen to anglo media and hence get the anglo view on Quebec), but I think it’s unwise to think that it’s really because they think you guys are great and that we’re not.”

    You mean they cannot form their own opinions and are pro-Canada simply because they watch the CBC??? And also, while I am not sure of the linguistic breakdown of Quebec Natives, a number of the Nations are French-speaking, not English.

    I think it comes down to two things:
    -one is that they can probably get more money out of the federal government
    -the other is that they distrust the Quebec government (at least the PQ) more

    Anonymous

    August 25, 2008 at 2:24 pm

  21. “I wonder if the differences between Natives in Quebec and the ROC could be due to the fact in some of the Western provinces at least, more Natives live off reserves than in Quebec.”
    Actually, I’d say then that this would make it more likely for natives in Western Canada to make *more* money than those in Quebec. It may be unfortunate but there is certainly more money to be made in a large city like Calgary than on a reserve like Hobbema.

    “With respect to taxes, does it matter where one lives? Do Natives not have to pay certain taxes if they live off reserves?”

    Yes, you are right. It wasn’t always like that but it was changed some years ago. To get all of the tax breaks, you have to live on a reserve.

    But this still doesn’t affect the Quebec vs. ROC figures, since we are talking about pre-tax income.

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 2:45 pm

  22. “You mean they cannot form their own opinions and are pro-Canada simply because they watch the CBC???”

    Of course they can form their own opinions. But no one is immune to outside influences. Not you. Not me. Not them. And as I mentioned, those natives in Quebec who speak English usually have more natural affinities with English-speaking Canadians, and have more difficulty connecting with francophones. This is totally normal of any group of people anywhere in the world, BTW.

    “And also, while I am not sure of the linguistic breakdown of Quebec Natives, a number of the Nations are French-speaking, not English.”

    It is estimated that something like 75% of natives in Quebec could be referred to as “English-oriented”, with the remaining 25% “French-oriented”.

    But most of the aboriginal groups whose relations with the Quebec government get lots of media attention are what you would call “English-oriented”: the Cree in the north near James Bay, the Mohawks around Montreal at Kanesatake and Kahnawake, the Micmacs of Listuguj in the Gaspé on the border with New Brunswick and, to a lesser degree, the Inuit in the far north.

    Aboriginal affairs are always a touchy subject everywhere in Canada, however Quebec’s relations with more francophone groups like the Hurons at Wendat (Quebec City), the north shore Innu at Betsiamites or Maliotenam or the Abenaki at Odanak near Sorel have never taken on a political Quebec-Canada/French-English dimension.

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 2:56 pm

  23. “-the other is that they distrust the Quebec government (at least the PQ) more”

    They’re not fond of the provincial Liberals either. They’re the ones who sent in the provincial police SWAT team to break up the blockade at Kanesatake (Oka) in 1990.

    Currently, the only aboriginal member of Quebec’s National Assembly (and only its second native representative ever – the first and last was in 1924) is the Parti Québécois’ Alexis Wawanoloath…

    The Bloc Québécois also at one time had an aboriginal MP, Bernard Cleary, but he was defeated in 2006 by Conservative Josée Verner, now Canada’s Heritage Minister.

    I can’t recall the Liberals (provincially or federally) getting any native candidates elected in Quebec. At least not in recent years.

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 3:09 pm

  24. I know they are not fond of the Liberals either. That is why I didn’t say “trust less”, but “distrust more”. For all the parties, the Native problems are something they just want to go away as quietly as poosible.

    “Currently, the only aboriginal member of Quebec’s National Assembly (and only its second native representative ever – the first and last was in 1924) is the Parti Québécois’ Alexis Wawanoloath…”

    Yes, I know he is the only one. I don’t think that says anything about relations between Quebec political parties and Natives. The PQ has already had Jewish and Anglo MPs as well. The guy after all, is just one person. Now, before you say something about how Natives also dislike the Liberals, I am not really saying that the Liberals have a better relationship with Natives than the PQ, I am just saying that this guy’s party affiliations do not necessarily say much about Native-Quebec government relations.

    Anonymous

    August 25, 2008 at 3:26 pm

  25. Agreed. Wawanoloath, Cleary, British-born PQ MNA David Payne, and the first black ever elected to Quebec’s National Assembly, the PQ’s Jean Alfred (in the Gatineau riding I am living in at the moment actually), were all elected by predominantly (massively in most cases in fact) old-stock francophone electorates.

    However, Bloc MPs Vivian Barbot, Maria Mourani and Maka Kotto (now a PQ MNA) were elected by more diverse ridings in Montreal.

    Acajack

    August 25, 2008 at 3:41 pm

  26. “Yes, I know he is the only one. I don’t think that says anything about relations between Quebec political parties and Natives. The PQ has already had Jewish and Anglo MPs as well. The guy after all, is just one person.”

    In the same way I think the Liberal Party of Canada is very grateful that Western Montreal Anglos and Allophones elected Lucienne Robillard (soon to be replaced by Marc Garneau), Bernard Patry and Stéphane Dion, helping maintain the illusion that the party has support in French-speaking Québec and is still a national party.

    Really, how many Liberal MPs were elected in solidly francophone riddings? Denis Coderre and Pablo Rodriguez?

    angryfrenchguy

    August 25, 2008 at 4:30 pm

  27. “However, Bloc MPs Vivian Barbot, Maria Mourani and Maka Kotto (now a PQ MNA) were elected by more diverse ridings in Montreal.”

    I am not talking about ridings here. I am not sure how competitive Wawanoloath’s riding is, but I assume it’s not since it is Abitibi. What I am saying is that one person’s party affiliations do not say anything about that person’s ethnic group’s relations with that party. I believe the only black MP in the French parliament (maybe in the last term, perhaps not in the current one) is/was a Front National deputy. I can assure you that most Africans do not vote, or have good feelings towards the Front National in France.

    Anonymous

    August 25, 2008 at 4:31 pm

  28. “I am not talking about ridings here. I am not sure how competitive Wawanoloath’s riding is, but I assume it’s not since it is Abitibi.”

    Actually, alyhough it might have been the consequence of anger over the lumber crisis, Wawanoloath beat a Liberal cabinet minister in a very red ridding:

    https://angryfrenchguy.com/2008/03/01/alexis-wawanoloath/

    The illusion that support for sovereignty is only the result of those backward habitants out in the woods is a persistent one in Canada. Actually, the most militantly indépendantist subgroup of society, a group that voted 68% in favour of sovereignty in 1995, is French-speaking Montrealers. Urban, multicultural, bilingual and cosmopolitan Montrealers…

    angryfrenchguy

    August 25, 2008 at 4:35 pm

  29. “The illusion that support for sovereignty is only the result of those backward habitants out in the woods is a persistent one in Canada. Actually, the most militantly indépendantist subgroup of society, a group that voted 68% in favour of sovereignty in 1995, is French-speaking Montrealers. Urban, multicultural, bilingual and cosmopolitan Montrealers…”

    Well, I am not sure what this has to do with the discussion on Natives… but never did I say that I thought Abitibi was a PQ riding because it was rural. I have actually lived in rural Quebec, so please, I do know that these places are not full of crazed sovereignists…

    Where does this 68% figure come from, obviously not from official voting results. Is it from a poll?

    Anonymous

    August 25, 2008 at 5:21 pm

  30. Actually Parizeau is the one that claimed 68% on the “Island of Montreal” during his infamous speech on the night of the referendum. The only data I ever found is the 63% figure in the “Region of Montreal”. Significantly more than outside Montreal.

    http://www.pum.umontreal.ca/apqc/95_96/drouilly/drouilly.htm

    Scroll down and you will see the native results and this fascinating comment: “En fait, si les anglophones et les allophones du Québec avaient appuyé le OUI dans les mêmes proportions que les Amérindiens, le OUI aurait remporté le référendum avec 52% des voix environ.”

    Even though 90% of Natives voted NO, if Anglophones and Allophones had supported the YES side in the same proportion as Natives, the YES side would’ve won with 52% of the vote!

    Wow.

    angryfrenchguy

    August 25, 2008 at 8:13 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: